webhosting for a photographic website

Jonathan,

<br>

I went to the copysafe demo on their website and got this:

<P>

<i>Mac computers cannot view Copysafe content.<br>

Unix computers cannot view Copysafe content.</i><p>

This may or may not be important to you, but I would think twice before paying a company

to put up barriers between me and my customers. <p>

 

Since I'm on a mac I wasn't able to see what the 'copysafe pro' was all about, but the

'secure image pro' gave up the image by simply using the grab utility to capture a

selection from the screen. In my opinion, a lot of people overreact to image downloads. A

low-res image is not very usful for any sort of reproduction, but you know your business

better than any of us. If your business model requires that you prevent people from using

even low-res images, you might be better off with an intrusive watermark--although

personally I hate them.

Mark.............thanks for the info, I won't be paying for Copysafe, I'm not interested in selling prints 'piecemeal', the website will be a marketing showcase for my work, I've had one very small corporate account in the past and would like to secure more of that kind of work.

 

I will probably go to work on incorporating a copyright statement, my wife works at a law firm so that will not be a problem, and some of the suggestions I've gotten here.

I use hostony.com for my site, at $9.85 per month. That price seems to be fairly standard. I'm happy with them and won't be changing in the foreseeable future.<p>

 

Have a look at the APUG.org site. They are now hosting member's web sites for $5 per month. It could be a good deal, but I need more than they were offering.<p>

 

Don't let image thievery hold you back and don't let the paranoia associated with it stop your viewers from seeing your work. Offer more from a real print than they could ever get from a tiny digital image and you'll still sell your work.<p>

 

Cheers,<br>Graeme

Jonathan,

 

The best way to protect your images is as part of a Flash application, aside from they are many ways to steal photographs regardless of claims to the contrary.

 

Having said that, the one that I use is Verio, they are a big organization, so they offer all the bells and upgrade options that you could want plus the offer a plan (the one I have) in which for 19.95 a month you get 750 megabytes of storage space, which is big concern for photographers, since images take a very large chunk of storage space.

 

Hope that helps

 

Hugh

I insert a signature into the image to discourage copyright infringement, and use Hurricane Electric for my web hosting, 9.95 a month. Works for me, check it out: www.edpiercephoto.com

A couple of thoughts--

 

1. Post your images in a low resolution and low quality JPEG format that is just big enough to see well but won't make great hard copies. You can select the sampling quality (a higher number is better quality) when reducing the original image to a smaller size in standard JPEG format. Are you really so worried about a VGA or even an XGA sized image that is not in "high quality" JPEG, especially if you have YOUR name and contact info on it?

 

2. Place a visible but still unobtrusive copyright notice along with complete contact information within the image. IF your work is really good, you should hope it gets passed along! Personally, I'd ponder selling copyrighted full-screen images in modest quality JPEG formatting, and post a good selection of low-rez 4x5 and 4x6 images that can be freely distributed so long as the copyright info is intact.

 

3. For the truly paranoid with high value images, doesn't PhotoShop have an add-on that encrypts the copyright information within the image coding?

 

4. As far as cost, I also recall that many ISPs provide "personal web pages" as part of their package, and you can potentially try this out as another option for low cost advertising. It won't be as flexible as a true web server, but cost wise it's perfect especially if you are limited to a dial-up for home service.

 

5. I don't know what your abilities are with computers, but my opinion is still that UNIX based servers using a MySQL database have advantages over MS offerings. They will tend to be more stable, more cost effective and probably also staffed by more competent system administrators. Other things will also be found, maybe running Oracle or DB2 databases, but I think a UNIX-MySQL environment will usually be the most cost-effective and also be indicative of serious SAs. Unless you are hooked on something else, ponder that in making your choice.

Jonathan, I wasn't casting aspersions on your talent as a photographer. My point was that people tend to steal the "pretty" pictures for their own personal use. With the millions of photographers out there with pretty pictures, chances are there won't be much stealing of your photos going on for commercial purposes. As I said, most of the people steal my photos for their own personal, not commercial use.

 

Particularly with a portrait photographer, I doubt anyone would steal photos of people or families, unless they are famous or it happens to be a particularly gorgeous model.

 

I look at it this way, if people want to steal my stuff for their web site or blogs, its free publicity for me. Particularly if they don't alter the photo and try to remove the copyright notice and web site address.

 

Just register your work, put a copyright notice on it and don't worry about people stealing it. Spend your energy taking pictures, not worrying about photos on your web site. And stay away from companies that claim they can protect your stuff for a lot of money. It's not worth it.

Nor is "registering" your work worth it unless it's very important stuff (and even then its often best to try to "batch" register those images). You need merely put the copyright in clear view, and as I noted, possibly also encode it within the raw image itself. Protect the high rez/raw data and send those files out to only those you trust to protect your rights. Either way, still better than having your originals lost, as Image Bank did with much of my 35mm stuff a few decades ago.

Hugh: Flash can be hacked very easily, as well.

 

Jonathan: It's best to make it difficult. I use a table setup with the image as the background of the cell and a clear 1x1 (expanded to fill) gif on top of it. If someone right clicks, they get a 1x1 clear gif. If they go to their cache, of course they can get the images. I also use ASP so that the page is served up on the fly.

 

I can also host your website if you wish. I have the developer package with 1&1.

 

Rich

www.rcodaphotography.com

Dean.............FWIW.................I have a small 'boutique' portrait business, that's not what the website will be about, the website is my attempt at my stage in life to market myself beyond what I've done professionally, there won't be any family shots on the site, except my attempt at a combination self portrait/group shot of my family in the 'about us' section.

 

Portraiture is what I do, some portraiture will be on the website, these portraits will be efforts at something artistic, not the 'static', 'say cheese' type of headshots I've dones as a 'hired hand' for the client, the website will be my statement of what else I can do, will include infrared work, imagery from 'Cyclops' which are two prototype lenses I put together, imagery from the 'Pelorinho', a celebrated area known for it's artists located in Bahia, and some of my digitally manipulated imagery.

 

8x10, 4x5, 6x12, 6x7, 6.45, and 35mm will be represented on the website, and yes, some scenics/landscapes mostly in infrared, regardless of whether or not they'll make Ansel 'roll over in his grave'.

 

I'm not losing sleep over this, and I'm not overly 'worried', which is why I've asked about these issues here before giving anybody a dime.

Thanks Richard for the info, I'll also contact you offline.

Well I won't post it here because I don't want to be accused of copyright infringement

myself--something I take very seriously as a photographer. But I was able to lift the image

via a screenshot from their online demo. Granted, it might protect you to some extent if

you have high res images on your website, but you shouldn't have high res images on your

website. Since most web images are at screen resolution, a screenshot is pretty much the

same as if you downloaded and saved the file. So this seems like a waste of money to me.

 

The best idea is to register your work early and often with the copyright office in DC, and

put your name and a copyright symbol ? (made by holding option + G on a mac) on each

and every image.

Obviously this is a hot issue with most photographers. But as nearly everyone here has mentioned, it's not necessary to spend a lot of money trying to protect your photos from thieves. If someone is determined to steal your stuff at all costs, unfortunately there is nothing that can stop them. That's the price you pay for the "openess" of the Internet.

 

There has been some good advice here. Using low resolution photos on your web site works to stop thieves from using your stuff, but kind of defeats the purpose of showcasing your photography.

 

I have stock and fine art shots on my web site, with no protection other than copyright symbol and web site url on the bottom of the photos. In the past three years I have had two instances of people trying to use my stuff for commercial purposes without permission. In both cases a strongly worded e-mail helped resolve the problem.

 

I regularly check my site stats to follow the referral URLs back to sites that steal my stuff. Either there is not that much thievery going on out there, or nobody is interested in my stuff. Either way, I consider it an annoyance, but I don't loose sleep over it. So far it hasn't taken any money out of my pocket.

 

If you are unlucky enough to have people steal your stuff and have them use it for commercial purposes or try to pass it off as their own, if you register the copyright, you will have a leg to stand on in court if it goes that far. Without registering your stuff, you can still sue, but there is a chance some judge will side with the thief and not you. In the scheme of things, registering copyright is not that expensive. For $30 you can register hundreds of shots at once. Just stick them on a CD and send it in with the application and the money every few months.

I like Dean's advice:

 

For $30 you can register hundreds of shots at once. Just stick them on a CD and send it in with the application and the money every few months."

 

 

On a CD you can place hundreds if not thousands of lower resolution images, which brings the cost of registering down to a very managable level. However, keep in mind that under the law and appellate rulings as they stand today, a copyright notice on the image should be more than enough to cover your tail. Either way you will need a lawyer and still have to spend some bucks if you end up enforcing your copyright in court, although those expenses should come back in the end.

Obsession with somebody stealing your photographs over the net! As if there

were not enough pictures around and persons able to create them were few

on the Globe. Ha! ha!

 

You can take any of mine. Good luck.

 

waz

go nag somebody else